Hi Bernd, ok, your issue must be something different then.
Best regards Christoph > -----Original Message----- > From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On > Behalf Of Bernd Eckenfels > Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2018 20:01 > To: OpenJDK Dev list <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> > Subject: Re: Oracle Java 8u161 regression in XML Schema Factory > > Hallo Christoph, > > Yes the Tests fail with -Djdk.xml.overrideDefaultParser=true (and false) as > well. > > Gruss > Bernd > -- > http://bernd.eckenfels.net > > Von: Langer, Christoph > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2018 16:16 > An: Bernd; OpenJDK Dev list; huizhe.w...@oracle.com > Betreff: RE: Oracle Java 8u161 regression in XML Schema Factory > > Hi Bernd, > > would your test still fail with system property "- > Djdk.xml.overrideDefaultParser=true"? > > I debugged a similar issue (if not the same) today and found that with change > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jaxp/rev/08a44c164993 the > default behavior for Xalan changed a bit. > > Before that change, the services mechanism was enabled to load the SAX > and DOM implementations for the use of Xalan. E.g. when > TransformerFactory.newInstance() was called, the services mechanism was > used and in the TransformerFactory (at least if it was the default JDK > implementation), the property to use the services mechanism was set as > well - wich was used to retrieve SAX and DOM parser implementations. > > And what hit me even more was that SAX2DOM had its private field > "DocumentBuilderFactory _factory" automatically initialized by a call to > DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance() which in turn would resolve any > custom DBF implementation if it were on classpath. Now, with the new > implementation, the _factory in SAX2DOM will be initialized with the > "overrideDefaultParser " setting coming from the Transformer Factory. So, > by setting -Djdk.xml.overrideDefaultParser=true, you will restore the old > behavior. > > @Joe: Is there some documentation for this change in default behavior that > came with JDK8u161? I assume it is for higher security and cannot be > reverted (e.g. by setting the feature default for > Djdk.xml.overrideDefaultParser to true). > > Best regards > Christoph > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: core-libs-dev [mailto:core-libs-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net] On > > Behalf Of Bernd > > Sent: Dienstag, 13. Februar 2018 22:55 > > To: OpenJDK Dev list <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> > > Subject: Re: Oracle Java 8u161 regression in XML Schema Factory > > > > Hello, > > > > > > 2018-01-25 17:41 GMT+01:00 Seán Coffey <sean.cof...@oracle.com>: > > > > > > > > Classes nearer to those below were touched via JDK-8186080: Transform > > XML > > > interfaces > > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/cb84156d54b2 > > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxp/rev/08a44c164993 > > > > > > This may be connected with some tools trying to redefine the classes > > > perhaps. Needs more investigating. Perhaps the XMLSchemaLoader > > changes are > > > a factor ? > > > > > > > I have ben able to extract a minimal reproducer. It is not related to > > XMLUnit, only to powermock. If it instruments com.sun but not javax.xml > > (and other combinations) then it fails. > > > > For details see the readme in this maven project: > > > > https://github.com/ecki/reproduce-schemaex > > > > I also found a way to make it work with both versions, so its no longer an > > issue for me, but there is definitely some changes (which might also be > > triggered in AppServers or OSGi containers with partially reconfigured > > implementations. Not sure if you want to investigate deeper). > > > > Gruss > > Bernd > > > > > > Here is the stacktrace anyway: > > >> > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.DVFactoryException: > Schema > > >> factory class > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.xs.SchemaDVFactoryImpl > > does > > >> not > > >> extend from SchemaDVFactory. > > >> at > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.SchemaDVFactory. > > >> getInstance(SchemaDVFactory.java:75) > > >> at > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.SchemaDVFactory. > > >> getInstance(SchemaDVFactory.java:57) > > >> at > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.xs.XMLSchemaLoader. > > >> reset(XMLSchemaLoader.java:1024) > > >> at > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.xs.XMLSchemaLoader. > > >> loadGrammar(XMLSchemaLoader.java:556) > > >> at > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.xs.XMLSchemaLoader. > > >> loadGrammar(XMLSchemaLoader.java:535) > > >> at > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.jaxp.validation.XMLSchema > > >> Factory.newSchema(XMLSchemaFactory.java:254) > > >> at javax.xml.validation.SchemaFactory.newSchema(SchemaFactory. > > >> java:638) > > >> at javax.xml.validation.SchemaFactory.newSchema(SchemaFactory. > > >> java:654) > > >> at > > >> com.seeburger.api.test.helpers.BuilderTestHelper.getCRSchema > > >> Validator(BuilderTestHelper.java:57) > > >> at > > >> com.seeburger.api.test.helpers.BuilderTestHelper.validateAnd > > >> Compare(BuilderTestHelper.java:73) > > >> at > > >> com.seeburger.api.test.KSMBuilderTest.testDeletePGP(KSMBuild > > >> erTest.java:196) > > >> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > > >> at > > >> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAcce > > >> ssorImpl.java:62) > > >> at > > >> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMe > > >> thodAccessorImpl.java:43) > > >> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498) > > >> at > org.junit.internal.runners.TestMethod.invoke(TestMethod.java:68) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> > unnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit44MethodRunner.runTestMethod > > >> (PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:310) > > >> at org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie$2.run(MethodRoadie. > > >> java:89) > > >> at > > >> org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.runBeforesThenTestTh > > >> enAfters(MethodRoadie.java:97) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> unnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit44MethodRunner.executeTest(P > > >> owerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:294) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit47R > > >> unnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit47MethodRunner.executeTestIn > > >> Super(PowerMockJUnit47RunnerDelegateImpl.java:127) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit47R > > >> unnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit47MethodRunner.executeTest(P > > >> owerMockJUnit47RunnerDelegateImpl.java:82) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> unnerDelegateImpl$PowerMockJUnit44MethodRunner.runBeforesThe > > >> nTestThenAfters(PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:282) > > >> at org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.runTest(MethodRoadie > > >> .java:87) > > >> at > > org.junit.internal.runners.MethodRoadie.run(MethodRoadie.java:50) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> unnerDelegateImpl.invokeTestMethod(PowerMockJUni > > >> t44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:207) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> > > > unnerDelegateImpl.runMethods(PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.ja > > va:146) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> > > > unnerDelegateImpl$1.run(PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:120) > > >> at > > >> org.junit.internal.runners.ClassRoadie.runUnprotected(ClassR > > >> oadie.java:34) > > >> at > > >> > org.junit.internal.runners.ClassRoadie.runProtected(ClassRoadie.java:44) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.internal.impl.PowerMockJUnit44R > > >> > > unnerDelegateImpl.run(PowerMockJUnit44RunnerDelegateImpl.java:122) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.common.internal.impl.JUnit4Test > > >> SuiteChunkerImpl.run(JUnit4TestSuiteChunkerImpl.java:106) > > >> at > > >> org.powermock.modules.junit4.common.internal.impl.AbstractCo > > >> > > > mmonPowerMockRunner.run(AbstractCommonPowerMockRunner.java:53) > > >> at > > >> > > > org.powermock.modules.junit4.PowerMockRunner.run(PowerMockRunner. > > java:59) > > >> at > > >> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference. > > >> run(JUnit4TestReference.java:86) > > >> at > > >> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run( > > >> TestExecution.java:38) > > >> at > > >> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTe > > >> sts(RemoteTestRunner.java:539) > > >> at > > >> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTe > > >> sts(RemoteTestRunner.java:761) > > >> at > > >> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run( > > >> RemoteTestRunner.java:461) > > >> at > > >> org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main( > > >> RemoteTestRunner.java:207) > > >> > > >> on the classpath jaxb-impl-2.2.5.jar but the specific packages are only > > >> loaded from rt.jar and redefined. I asume the later is done by > > Powermock. > > >> > > >> Line 611: [Loaded > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.SchemaDVFactory from > > >> C:\Program > > >> Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_161\jre\lib\rt.jar] > > >> Line 616: [Loaded > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.xs.BaseSchemaDVFactory > > from > > >> C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_161\jre\lib\rt.jar] > > >> Line 617: [Loaded > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.xs.SchemaDVFactoryImpl > > from > > >> C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_161\jre\lib\rt.jar] > > >> Line 618: [Loaded > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.SchemaDVFactory from > > >> __JVM_DefineClass__] > > >> Line 619: [Loaded > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.xs.BaseSchemaDVFactory > > from > > >> __JVM_DefineClass__] > > >> Line 620: [Loaded > > >> com.sun.org.apache.xerces.internal.impl.dv.xs.SchemaDVFactoryImpl > > from > > >> __JVM_DefineClass__] > > >> > > >> Is that something you are concerned? > > >> > > >> Gruss > > >> Bernd > > >> > > >
